Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

On Hate Speech

For anyone who might want to have a side conversation...you're welcome here!
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by Joat42   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:50 pm

Joat42
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1864
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 7:01 am
Location: Sweden

DrakBibliophile wrote:On the Paradox of Tolerance idea, there are plenty of people that I wish Would Shut UP.

There are plenty of people who I wish would go away and not come back.

I am just not arrogant enough to Think That I Am The Proper Person To Make Them Shut UP.

As far as I'm concerned people who support Banning So-Called Hate Speech (by Government or private groups) Deserve to Be Permanently Banned Because Of Their Supreme Arrogance.

Because They Believe That Their Opinion of "What is Hate Speech" is Fact not Opinion.

I don't know what your definition of hate speech is, it seems kind of nebulous. In general, hate speech is defined as "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation". I also include political affiliation in that. Reveling in public fantasies how to "kill group xyz" cannot be seen as anything else than hate speech.

The simple truth is that not all political viewpoints have merit. Saying otherwise is the same as adhering to the view from nowhere, ie propagating the idea that all views have equal merit and should be heard. Those who take that stance is helping propagating lies, misinformation, hate, racism and conspiracy theories by implicitly acknowledging them as having the same worth as verifiable facts and truth.

Do some people conflate hate speech with "speech I'm uncomfortable with"? Of course. But that shouldn't stop the rest of us to speak up against real hate speech.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by DrakBibliophile   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 4:58 pm

DrakBibliophile
Admiral

Posts: 2311
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: East Central Illinois

Yep, those Republicans/Trump Supporters are racists and should be sent to re-education camps.

Does the above "fit" your definition of "Hate Speech"?

Yes Or No.

If NO, Why The Heck Not?


Joat42 wrote:
DrakBibliophile wrote:On the Paradox of Tolerance idea, there are plenty of people that I wish Would Shut UP.

There are plenty of people who I wish would go away and not come back.

I am just not arrogant enough to Think That I Am The Proper Person To Make Them Shut UP.

As far as I'm concerned people who support Banning So-Called Hate Speech (by Government or private groups) Deserve to Be Permanently Banned Because Of Their Supreme Arrogance.

Because They Believe That Their Opinion of "What is Hate Speech" is Fact not Opinion.

I don't know what your definition of hate speech is, it seems kind of nebulous. In general, hate speech is defined as "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation". I also include political affiliation in that. Reveling in public fantasies how to "kill group xyz" cannot be seen as anything else than hate speech.

The simple truth is that not all political viewpoints have merit. Saying otherwise is the same as adhering to the view from nowhere, ie propagating the idea that all views have equal merit and should be heard. Those who take that stance is helping propagating lies, misinformation, hate, racism and conspiracy theories by implicitly acknowledging them as having the same worth as verifiable facts and truth.

Do some people conflate hate speech with "speech I'm uncomfortable with"? Of course. But that shouldn't stop the rest of us to speak up against real hate speech.
*
Paul Howard (Alias Drak Bibliophile)
*
Sometimes The Dragon Wins! [Polite Dragon Smile]
*
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by DrakBibliophile   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:03 pm

DrakBibliophile
Admiral

Posts: 2311
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: East Central Illinois

Hey! I'm a White Guy.

By some people's standards, that means that I'm A Racist and a Sexist.

If somebody said that the Rights Of White Males should be Restricted, is that speech that should be Banned?



Donnachaidh wrote:So your argument is that if a private entity allows any political speech is should not be allowed to put a limit on it? Does that mean it should be forced to allow people to advocate for laws that restrict or limit the rights of people based on immutable characteristics (e.g. ethnicity or sex)?

*
Paul Howard (Alias Drak Bibliophile)
*
Sometimes The Dragon Wins! [Polite Dragon Smile]
*
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by DrakBibliophile   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 5:08 pm

DrakBibliophile
Admiral

Posts: 2311
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: East Central Illinois

Sorry Mister, but I gotten the Strong Idea that "Just Calling It Hate Speech" is enough for somebody to be banned.

IE The Left uses the concept of "Hate Speech" in their Witch Hunts.

Now, it is nice that you had fellow Moderators to keep you honest.

But on Too Many Sites, The Moderators are just as bigoted against the "Improper Thoughts" (non-Lefty Thoughts) as the majority of Posters.

The E wrote:
DrakBibliophile wrote:On the Paradox of Tolerance idea, there are plenty of people that I wish Would Shut UP.

There are plenty of people who I wish would go away and not come back.

I am just not arrogant enough to Think That I Am The Proper Person To Make Them Shut UP.


Until I resigned from that position, I was a moderator in a moderately large forum. I was and still am trusted enough by that community to be one of those "proper persons".

So, you know. That is coloring my thoughts on this matter to an extent.

Being a moderator, being trusted to be a moderator, has nothing to do with arrogance, but with long work at building up a reputation for impartiality and good judgment in the service of the community. It's not something anyone can or should just claim for themselves, it's a learned skill.

The Paradox of Tolerance is one of the guiding principles I took to heart as I was learning the skills required. Managing a community means that, on occasion, the decision needs to be made to cut someone out of it. Never lightly, never at the first offence, but some people who are determined enough to make asses of themselves do need to be shown the door eventually.

As far as I'm concerned people who support Banning So-Called Hate Speech (by Government or private groups) Deserve to Be Permanently Banned Because Of Their Supreme Arrogance.

Because They Believe That Their Opinion of "What is Hate Speech" is Fact not Opinion.


What is and isn't bannable speech isn't something that can be determined objectively. For some fora, no speech is bannable, and those tend to become infested with fascists sooner or later. For others, anything but the most innocuous of phrasings is considered harmful, and they're just as toxic and uninhabitable by actual humans; What the correct middle ground between those poles is is something that a community has to work out over time.

Do I believe that my definition of bannable speech is a "fact"? Hell no. It's an expression of my personal values. That's why well-run forums have more than one moderator on hand to decide things and feedback mechanisms so that the community and moderation team are in dialogue, not in conflict.
*
Paul Howard (Alias Drak Bibliophile)
*
Sometimes The Dragon Wins! [Polite Dragon Smile]
*
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by The E   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:27 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2587
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

DrakBibliophile wrote:Yep, those Republicans/Trump Supporters are racists and should be sent to re-education camps.

Does the above "fit" your definition of "Hate Speech"?

Yes Or No.

If NO, Why The Heck Not?


I'd give that user a warning for being a lazy troll.
DrakBibliophile wrote:Hey! I'm a White Guy.

By some people's standards, that means that I'm A Racist and a Sexist.

If somebody said that the Rights Of White Males should be Restricted, is that speech that should be Banned?


Again, a warning for low effort trolling.

Neither of these is hate speech in my estimation, it's more along the lines of rhetorical hyperbole - and in both cases, the average poster who'd make such comments isn't capable of employing hyperbole properly.
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by The E   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 6:30 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2587
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Bielefeld, Germany

DrakBibliophile wrote:Sorry Mister, but I gotten the Strong Idea that "Just Calling It Hate Speech" is enough for somebody to be banned.

IE The Left uses the concept of "Hate Speech" in their Witch Hunts.


You're not talking to a member of "The Left", whatever that term means in your vocabulary. You're talking to me, and trying to predict how I would react based on your prejudices will just go nowhere.
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by DrakBibliophile   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 7:03 pm

DrakBibliophile
Admiral

Posts: 2311
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 3:54 pm
Location: East Central Illinois

My final post.

Hate Speech has been "defined" by some as "Speech That Will Cause/Provoke Harm To Others".

To me that is a Bad definition because it involves "forecasting the future". While the US has "incitement to riot" Laws, the Supreme Court has correctly ruled that such Laws have to be applied "after the fact of the riot" (not before) and that the prosecution has to PROVE Beyond that the Speech actually provoked the riot.

Another definition posted involve "Speech that is intended to deprive some group of their rights". There are three problems with that "definition".

First, "what is a right". IE Is it a "right" generally accepted by the general population or is it a "right" decreed by a powerful minority within the government.

Second, I've seen too much evidence that "some groups are more important than other groups". IE If one group is seen as the "oppressor group", then the enforcers of the law don't see a problem with the speech.

Third, which ties into the US Supreme Court's position on "incitement to riot". IMO Talk is cheap. Some nutcase can talk about "depriving some group's rights" but the likelihood of it happening is extremely low. What should be illegal are Actions not Speech. Silencing people only drives haters underground and IMO will cause problems in the future.

Finally, it is one thing for the owners of a private group to say "this sort of speech won't be tolerated here" but another thing for outsiders government or otherwise using various means to force the owners to ban certain speech on their site.



The E wrote:
DrakBibliophile wrote:Sorry Mister, but I gotten the Strong Idea that "Just Calling It Hate Speech" is enough for somebody to be banned.

IE The Left uses the concept of "Hate Speech" in their Witch Hunts.


You're not talking to a member of "The Left", whatever that term means in your vocabulary. You're talking to me, and trying to predict how I would react based on your prejudices will just go nowhere.
*
Paul Howard (Alias Drak Bibliophile)
*
Sometimes The Dragon Wins! [Polite Dragon Smile]
*
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by Joat42   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:54 pm

Joat42
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1864
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 7:01 am
Location: Sweden

DrakBibliophile wrote:Yep, those Republicans/Trump Supporters are racists and should be sent to re-education camps.

Does the above "fit" your definition of "Hate Speech"?

Yes Or No.

If NO, Why The Heck Not?

Context matters. Now, try again without the bad hyperbole.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by Joat42   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:55 pm

Joat42
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1864
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 7:01 am
Location: Sweden

DrakBibliophile wrote:But on Too Many Sites, The Moderators are just as bigoted against the "Improper Thoughts" (non-Lefty Thoughts) as the majority of Posters.

Which "non-lefty thoughts" would that be? Give us examples.

---
Jack of all trades and destructive tinkerer.


Anyone who have simple solutions for complex problems is a fool.
Top
Re: On Hate Speech
Post by Donnachaidh   » Thu Feb 18, 2021 10:27 pm

Donnachaidh
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1007
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:11 pm

That's not what I asked. I have kept my comments on this thread to asking questions about what you're saying thing should be; primarily on if private entities should be compelled to host speech they disagree with or do not support.

To answer your (rather lazy) attempt at strawman/red herring, I don't think someone should be banned for any single thing unless it is incredibly egregious (like one using racial/cultural/sexist slurs). But I do think a comment like that would deserve a warning.

DrakBibliophile wrote:Hey! I'm a White Guy.

By some people's standards, that means that I'm A Racist and a Sexist.

If somebody said that the Rights Of White Males should be Restricted, is that speech that should be Banned?



Donnachaidh wrote:So your argument is that if a private entity allows any political speech is should not be allowed to put a limit on it? Does that mean it should be forced to allow people to advocate for laws that restrict or limit the rights of people based on immutable characteristics (e.g. ethnicity or sex)?

_____________________________________________________
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain
Top

Return to Free-Range Topics...